Targeting the Trans-Surgery Whistleblower.
-
New Indictment of Whistleblower Eithan Haim Is Even More Outrageous
You shouldn’t need any further evidence that the only reason that the Department of Justice is targeting courageous whistleblower Dr. Eithan Haim with a life-destroying criminal prosecution is that he ran afoul of the transgender ideology that dominates the Biden administration. But if you do, the superseding indictment that DOJ filed on Thursday provides it.
DOJ’s original indictment propagated the false, but incendiary, notion that Dr. Haim disclosed HIPAA-protected information about pediatric patients and that journalist Christopher Rufo “published [that] HIPAA protected information.” It further misled the world into thinking that Dr. Haim sneakily obtained access to Texas Children’s Hospital’s electronic medical patient files more than two years after his work at the hospital had ended. And it alleged that Dr. Haim “caused malicious harm to TCH, pediatric patients at TCH and its physicians by contacting” Rufo.
DOJ’s superseding indictment implicitly concedes the major point that I spelled out in my first post on its persecution of Dr. Haim: Dr. Haim did not disclose HIPAA-protected information to Rufo, and Rufo did not publish HIPAA-protected information.
Paragraph 18 of the original indictment alleged that Rufo (“Person1”) “published HIPAA protected information obtained by Haim.” Paragraph 14 of the superseding indictment drops the mistaken claim that the information that Rufo published was HIPAA-protected. It now contends only that Rufo “published personal information.” That information, I’ll emphasize, did not remotely identify the patients, and DOJ has never contended otherwise. As I’ve pointed out, DOJ discloses far more revealing information about the patients, as it identifies them by their initials.
Unlike the original indictment, Counts 2 through 4 of the superseding indictment no longer contain the false charge that Dr. Haim “did obtain and/or wrongfully disclose” HIPAA-protected information. Those revised counts now allege that he “did obtain and/or use” such information.
DOJ’s superseding indictment also acknowledges what I highlighted a month ago: far from sneaking his way onto TCH’s patient database long after his work at TCH ended, Haim continued to see patients at TCH at least as late as April 2023. The superseding indictment no longer alleges that Haim in April 2023 “requested remote access so he could discreetly covertly access pediatric patient files.” It instead implicitly recognizes that he legitimately had access to the database.
DOJ’s superseding indictment no longer contends that Dr. Haim “caused malicious harm” to anyone. It instead maintains that he acted with an “intent” to “cause malicious harm to TCH and its physicians”—not to patients. So why are the patient-focused protections of HIPAA being misused to protect TCH and its physicians against having their abuses exposed?
DOJ’s allegation that Dr. Haim intended malicious harm against TCH and its physicians is absurd. As I’ve stated from the beginning, there is not an iota of evidence that would suggest that Dr. Haim acted with malice. In his own words, “I knew that it was my moral responsibility to expose what was happening to these children.”
Although it’s good to see DOJ retreat from some of its more outlandish claims, that retreat makes it all the more outrageous that it is continuing to prosecute Dr. Haim and to punish him with penalties of up to 10 years in prison and up to $250,000 in fines.. It is inconceivable that the Biden administration would be prosecuting another whistleblower on these alleged facts if one of its pet causes—here, transgender medical interventions on children—were not involved. It’s long past time for Attorney General Merrick Garland to dismiss this indictment.
-
NRO: https://www.nationalreview.com/2025/01/clear-dr-haim/
The prosecution has been a tragedy of errors. The lead prosecutor stayed on the case after being suspended by the state bar for nonpayment of dues, in violation of court and DOJ rules. She later withdrew when it came out that her family’s company (of which she was a former executive) co-sponsored two fundraisers for TCH while the case was pending. The response from the Justice Department was not a humble apology but a request for a gag order to prevent any of this from being reported. Our Ed Whelan and Andy McCarthy have done yeoman’s work in ensuring that a story the DOJ wanted buried would see the light of day.
This prosecution is not just an abuse of the prosecutorial power to wage culture war in aid of the abuse of children; it’s also a menace to democracy and a free press. The new leadership of the Justice Department should end it at once, and it should investigate and publicly expose how it came to be brought. Trump can go further by offering to Dr. Haim a full public apology, and perhaps the sort of show of solidarity that he gave to Daniel Penny. While he’s at it, he should instruct the pardon office at the DOJ to compile a list of other cases, including those of peaceful pro-life protesters, who were likewise subjected to culture-war lawfare.
-
Trump Justice Department moves to dismiss…
-
Trump Justice Department moves to dismiss…
@LuFins-Dad said in Targeting the Trans-Surgery Whistleblower.:
Trump Justice Department moves to dismiss…
Which department does he go to for a refund of his legal fees?
-
Then the Dept of Conservative Publishing.
-
What happens to his burgeoning medical career, now?
-
My guess is if he sues for malicious prosecution, if the facts are bad enough, the new administration will just settle.
@jon-nyc said in Targeting the Trans-Surgery Whistleblower.:
My guess is if he sues for malicious prosecution, if the facts are bad enough
In the original indictment, iirc, there was an allegation that he violated HIPAA laws.
No evidence he did that, and those charges were subsequently dropped.
I'd really love to see what he disclosed, and how he got access to it. If you're on the staff of a hospital, you have access to surgical schedules, etc. However, if you access the chart of a patient who is not under your care, that could spell problems.
